Portland, ME - New Construction Continued

^Thanks, Matt!

There's some really neat nighttime shots from the top of the new Hyatt on Fore Street and the Bay House on this Flickr account. I enjoy the urban exploration photography genre, but I don't think I'd be cut out for it.
 
rn1Hqaw.jpg


DYmmO9q.jpg
 
Is there any retail in Phase I of Bay House?

They have a new banner up on the corner of the Hyatt hotel construction site on Fore street. The corner glass looks really odd in random in the designs I've seen. Hope it looks good when it's done.

On a side note, I've found way more construction news in the Portland section of the Bangor Daily News online than I have in any Portland papers. Everyone should bookmark it.
 
grittys457 said:
Is there any retail in Phase I of Bay House?

They have a new banner up on the corner of the Hyatt hotel construction site on Fore street. The corner glass looks really odd in random in the designs I've seen. Hope it looks good when it's done.

On a side note, I've found way more construction news in the Portland section of the Bangor Daily News online than I have in any Portland papers. Everyone should bookmark it.
Click to expand...
Yes, I follow the BDN on a daily basis. They are always way ahead of the PPH on what's going on in the Portland area. Also, the coverage is usually much more in depth than what the Press Herald has.
 
Interesting, the Bay House Phase II is back? I thought those plans were scrapped and the contract zone expired? Good to see that's not the case. I am sure the first phase will be a success. It is a little imposing for the existing scale of the neighborhood, but will no doubt be a leader in the future scale of the neighborhood.
 
One more thing — I noticed today on my lunch break that they're lifting up cladding and windows onto back side of the Fore Street hotel project.

Interestingly, it's going up in prefabricated modules, with the windows pre-installed into the wall framing and cladding. The exterior work might get wrapped up a lot more quickly this way — they're probably aiming to get it buttoned up before the cold weather.
 
cneal said:
One more thing — I noticed today on my lunch break that they're lifting up cladding and windows onto back side of the Fore Street hotel project.

Interestingly, it's going up in prefabricated modules, with the windows pre-installed into the wall framing and cladding. The exterior work might get wrapped up a lot more quickly this way — they're probably aiming to get it buttoned up before the cold weather.
Click to expand...

Someone should tell the neighbors who show up and complain about on street parking demand that that concern is totally irrelevant to administration of the city code which is the ONLY task of the planning board. This board does not set parking policy. And neighbors do not own title t the public streets. Their interest in on street parking should not be prioritized over the potentially new residents'. That just inflates structured or other on site (surface) demand and clogs streets--counterintuitively, by making driving more attractive.
 
The latest Avesta proposal on Cumberland Avenue doesn't look too bad to me. I would like to see some retail/restaurant space on the first floor there, like at 645 Congress Street, but I'm just dreaming. Thanks for finding the Bay House II renderings, Cneal.
 
@PortlandArch — unfortunately, city code does give the Planning Board some authority to set parking requirements for affordable housing in cases where developers want to go under the city's mandate of one space per unit. In practice, this happens with almost every affordable housing project, because expensive government parking quotas are inherently at odds with middle-class housing. But to the Planning Board's credit, they've shown a willingness to defer to the developers' requests.

The city's bigger problem is its inept Parking Division management. John Peverada, the city's chief parking manager, is writing to the Planning Board to lobby them to force Avesta Housing to spend more affordable housing funds on new parking garages (see:
http://www.portlandmaine.gov/planning/pbpackets/409 Cumberland Ave/PB Memo and Attach.pdf).

I particularly like how he cites "research" from a Denver-based parking lot CEO. Luckily, Mr. Peverada's comments will be seen for what they are: an insult to the Planning Board's intelligence.
 
At this point I am a Corey groupie, nonetheless, wonderful shot of Danforth On High which really turned out lovely.
 
cneal said:
@PortlandArch — unfortunately, city code does give the Planning Board some authority to set parking requirements for affordable housing in cases where developers want to go under the city's mandate of one space per unit. In practice, this happens with almost every affordable housing project, because expensive government parking quotas are inherently at odds with middle-class housing. But to the Planning Board's credit, they've shown a willingness to defer to the developers' requests.

The city's bigger problem is its inept Parking Division management. John Peverada, the city's chief parking manager, is writing to the Planning Board to lobby them to force Avesta Housing to spend more affordable housing funds on new parking garages (see:
http://www.portlandmaine.gov/planning/pbpackets/409 Cumberland Ave/PB Memo and Attach.pdf).

I particularly like how he cites "research" from a Denver-based parking lot CEO. Luckily, Mr. Peverada's comments will be seen for what they are: an insult to the Planning Board's intelligence.
Click to expand...

Well you are correct it gives the Board power to set parking requirements, but not parking policy. The Board can only implement policy previously set (by Council). The line gets blurred, but the legislatively adopted rules for waiving requirements are firmly established already. My bigger point was that the pre-existing neighbors who complain about on street parking demand really have no right to complain. Actually, the do have a right, but it emerges from the right to speak at a public hearing rather than from the right to real estate. Typically, before an applicant can be granted land use permission, it must prove right, title, or interest (purchaser and sale agreement for example) to real estate. I'm simply pointing out here that it is curious that, in light of that, the same standard is not used for those who complain about on street parking demand -- which refers to a good (public parking) that belongs to all of us, including potential new residents. It appears to be assumed however that the neighbors who complain about "their" spots own those spots, which they don't. Therefore, I think the Chair of the Planning Board should exclude, after the first comment, further comments which speak about onstreet parking as either irrelevant (the truth), or redundant--both of which would be permissible. On street parking demand has little more to do with parking requirements administration than the most recent Red Sox game, and surely the latter would be excluded as irrelevant. Simply put, either the requirements for waiver (on public transit route, etc. etc.) are met, or they are not met, and it has little to do with whether on street parking demand will increase. That is a legitimate, but irrelevant, concern. And a selfish one. Unless the Code has changed I don't think on street parking has anything to do with the standards for a waiver.
 
Thanks for the update Corey! I don't think I'll recognize the downtown when I move back to Maine in a couple of years! Between these projects ^ springin' up and the 4+ proposals for next year, this place is boomin' (for Maine standards that is).

What ever happened to the proposal to go vertical 1-2 stories on Canal Plaza? Did it run out of gas? Also, any updates on the large project proposed for Bayside (the one with the 14 story towers)?
 
Hello everyone! This marks my first post and I am looking forward to contributing many more. I am a resident / urbanist of Portland, also a photographer of some sorts. A new friend I made (Corey) informed me about this Forum. Looks Awesome and I am happy to be here!

Not many people noticed this building when it was under demolition last month. I believe it was the Portland Can Company. It's located on Read st. by Canco Rd. Here are some photos I took at night, most likely the last shots ever taking of the old beauty. Cheers!

1
8728205632_269dfc14b9_z.jpg



2
8718354332_b118fd7587_z.jpg



3
8718315090_4f9bb35118_z.jpg



4
8718049466_f6d0908838_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the forum and great first post pics!

I've driven by it on Read street literally thousands of times in my life. Read is such an odd street anyway. It's zoning makes no sense whatsoever.
 
Welcome, Gervs! Some nice shots of the old can company. Does anyone know what is happening to that empty lot now?

In other planned construction news, I think I posted a link to this project called Munjoy Heights (by Redfern Properties) a while back. Seems they recently updated their website with floorplans and an map. I thought it was just one building, but apparently this is going to be 29 units spread over 6 buildings. It will be at the end of Sheridan Street where it meets Walnut Street. There is currently a neat little Portland Trails trail (Jack Path) that runs through the site. I don't remember seeing it in the planning board materials but it must have the green light because there are already units reserved. All 3 bedrooms, 2.5 baths, starting at $519,000.

munjoyheights-A-building.jpg


munjoy-heights-map.gif


UZWSwnH.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top